I'd like to echo Star Pilot - would Brad (or someone from the development team) please explain what you are trying to fix with this 5 bc per starbase or 1.7 thing? We're just guessing which problem you are tyring to address.
1) I wish the other races would contact you when you build a trade good, and make an offer. 2) I wish there was some master list of who made what. The Arceans developed Aphodesiac, later on I'm trying to remember "Was is Arcean, Alexian, or Altarian?" 3) I really wish the majors and minors (particularly minors) built starbases to boost and defend their inhabited sectors. Instead, they spew out military craft and colony ships.
I have a simple solution (though it might be tough to code) Starbases on resources have no maintenance The first starbase in a populated system (colonized PQ 15+) has no maintenance. All other starbases have maintenance (5 BC?). This makes you pay for all starbases in the middle of nowhere (such as trading bases, culture booster bases, range booster bases, and attack bases), but doesn't punish you for building a starbase to boost sector production or mine a resourc
It might work to have the points "freed up" by disadvantages be 1/2 the points it would cost to gain said advantage. If Speed +1 is 4 pts, the speed -1 is -2 points. Also, I'd only allow 1 level of disads. hmm +20% defense is 2 point, -20% defence would be -1. Diplomacy, same. Influence, same. Loyalty, same (I could see taking this disad). Military production, same. etc. +10% economics is 2 points, -10% economics is -1. You'd basically be losing 2 advantage
Force the player to pay maintenance on any starbase that is in a sector w/o friendly planets, or on a resource. This reflects the cost of building a starbase way out in the middle of nowhere, as opposed to close to home, or on a resource that would offset those costs. You can still build up a freighter booster, range booster, culture booster, or attack booster, but it'll cost you. Also make every starbase beyond the first in a sector cost maintenance. And make it so that only the be
Auto Explore for scouts and sensor drones. Doesn't the AI already have one set up? Not that I've ever seen the AI using scouts, come to think of it... Alternately, a way to find unexplored territory on the mini-map so I can send my scouts there. "What will you give me for this?" dialogue on diplomatic trading screen. More good / evil options for planets - what ever happened to the 16th century society from OS/2? Good civs can't aquire evil techs, and vice versa.<
Yes, the game definitely needs a "what would you offer me for this?" option, or alternately, "what can I offer you for that?". However, I've found that the new use of the sliders (set it to 100, then pull the slider up the months until it turns yellow) is a vast improvement over v1.1. The slider also works well for purchasing influence. FWIW, I usually only trade with minor races - and I never trade away diplomacy techs.
I've found it more profitable to sell them my techs and trade goods. 10 bc mo for a few months to start, 100 bc/mo for 10-30 turns later in the game. They never seem to sell the techs to the majors, either. I've had games with tribute of over 1000, allowing me to keep at 100% spending. Second, I always give/sell them the trade tech, and poof! 2 trade routes opened up between them and me. Adds up over time. I just have to be careful not to give them any tech that increases dip
I use it to ID minor civs. I look at the map, look for white stars that don't have a production overlay, and send my scouts or sensor drone fortune over to take a look. Sometimes I find unclaimes yellow stars, other times minor civs, other times major civ's I haven't met yet. But I do play Huge galaxies. It's never been much use in Large galaxies.
I've been able to roll over my opponents with Luck and +15% PQ. I wasn't able to win as easily with +15% PQ and Creative. But, that has been just 2 games (not sure how to submit, can't get SD to work right) and the second just crashed on me 3 turns from my influence win. And yes, I tend to find lots and lots of good stars near Sol. I would like to know a little more about Brave, Creative, and Luck, however. It is hard to decide how useful they are. I didn't notice anything different
Stardock Forums
I'd use it to pay off infrstructure and maintenence. Your planet won't be happy if you idle it's entire military industrial complex, but what if you set it to "logistics" so the unused miltary production is applied to pay for fleet maintenence. Likewise, unused social production is set to pay for social project maintenance.
I like playing a "nice" civ - not just good, but I dislike going to war and the attendant electronic genocide of conquering planets. Yes, I rely on Influence victories. I wish is was easier to get minor civs to defect through influence. I've spent years trying to get them to (and, admittedly, sometimes they do), but it is frustrating to see them get conquered by another player - and then culturally defect to me a few turns later. Makes me wonder if the minor races are playing by the s
I'm playing a second game in 1.02 and the Torians aren't colonizing nearby yellow suns again - even ones in the same sector. Nor are they placing constructors on resources. I have a nice saved game, if you'd give me directions on sending it to you. Only other new thing is that I switched from creative to lucky.
I'll be getting a new computer over Xmas (my old PII is about to give up the ghost). Actually, I'll probably pick up a used computer from a local store. But before I do that I need to know the requirements for playing GalCiv. I've heard that 600 Mhz is minimum; is there a reccomended? And what RAM will I need? I was also hoping someone could tell what me MOO3 will require. Is this written down anywhere?
"In every other field I come last--except for influence, which spikes right at the end of graph. I then checked the graphs in the domestic display, where it says that my influence is 85899! This just can't be right. I've got maybe eight ships, two planets, and one starbase--at the lowest level of developlment. How I got such an astronomically high influence, I haven't a clue." IIRC, that number (85899) in the games way of saying "-1" with an unsigned int, right? What actually happen
Stardock Forums
I also am a fan of EU. I'd love to see some form of Causus Belli implemented in the game - just list the reasons a normal player would start a war and program the AI accordingly. You could even have the AI threaten - do this / stop doing that, or we'll go to war. Or you could threaten the AI. Good civ's shouldn't be allowed to go to war w/o a clear Causus Belli (Afganistan, WWII, Korea, Kuwait). Good civs shouldn't invade their neighbors just because they are weak. In fact, strong
Probably because there is no real difference, except for screen color and that being Good screws you hard in exchange for some late game techs. Also determines who you can ally with. I remember playing the Gaians in SMAC. Ally with UoP and PK, fight Miriam, Santiogo, Hive. Try to remain friends with Morgan, but he usually gives up on me after I go green. Same kinda deal.
I have an idea. Drop the maintenace cost of the BattleAxe to 2 or 3 (is 1 BA worth 2 Defenders on defence, or 3?). As it is, these ships cost as much to maintain as a BattleCruiser. Added to a planet with planetary defences, shouldn't they be able to hold off a BC?
Either that, or SB upgrades that produce research independant of the planets of the sector.
What if there was a morale bonus for good and penalty for evil? say, up to +/- 20% empire wide (-20% for evil, +20 for good). Given that one good act is a -16% empire wide morale, and some evil acts grant hundreds (thousands?) of bc, this doesn't seem all that excessive. Even a +/- 50% morale based on Good/Evil would probably not be excessive. But the bonus should be no more than 1% per act (you need 20 good acts to get to +20 or 50 to get to +50, can't get it from just 1 good act).
Well, I'd have to say that your experiment was a success.
Historically, the difference between good and evil is longevity. Evil decisions tend to have fairly nasty long term side effects, while good decisions tend to have positive long term benifits. This happens even today - be a bad person, you'll get away with it for a while, but it will evetually catch up with you. Be a good person, you'll fall behind at first but eventually catch up. My reccomendation is to have "good" acts eventually have positive long term effect, and "Bad" Acts a n
Hear Hear! People keep showing up asking "why do my people hate me" - being able to ask the senate why morale is so low would be really really nice. Just make sure it's accurate - the game should look at the algorithm and figure out the biggest "negative" or area with more room for improvement. Don't have it give a generic "Build Morale Enhancements" when the real problem is "taxes too high / spending too high / treasury too low"
I've been looking though the lovely .pdf's over at http://webpages.charter.net/trevorpowdrell/, and I'm somewhat concerned about some of the dead end paths on the research tree, specifically "Photons" and "Improved Environment Control" I find such dead ends aethicallly displeasing, and I was wondering if we could make these techs a pre-requisite for some other techs. My suggestions would be to make Photons a pre-req for Shields (and the Star Hawk), and Improved Environment Control a pre-req
Been reading the manual in the Encyclopedia. I'm afraid it doesn't match what I've seen in recent screen shots, particularly the Setup Screen. There are 9 factions in the Manual, but I've only seen 6 in screenshots (Federalist, Populist, War Party, Populists, Technologists, Mercantile Pact). What heppened to the others? Did they die from a lack of interest? And are the bonuses on the other 6 still the same as in the manual? Similar Q's for the ability bonuses. They seem to h